64 lines
2.8 KiB
Plaintext
64 lines
2.8 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From brong at fastmail.fm Wed Mar 19 03:52:31 2014
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:52 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] STARTTLS after PREAUTH
|
|
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1403191013240.31260@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
|
|
References: <20140318141305.Horde.iyy0UP8Ostx9TojRZiFyjw1@bigworm.curecanti.org>
|
|
<059bac1f-35eb-4f87-bd5e-e986dfb46b83@flaska.net>
|
|
<20140318152549.Horde.0C2tXb4vwx_29xt0ZbwdEQ4@bigworm.curecanti.org>
|
|
<1395187453.9897.96141249.7BE88CD8@webmail.messagingengine.com>
|
|
<08C9B4E3-B0C3-40B3-AF7A-1B29FA09A0C9@orthanc.ca>
|
|
<1395195811.7439.96177201.64A35884@webmail.messagingengine.com>
|
|
<0327E34F-DD13-4350-A16F-FE621E029FEB@orthanc.ca>
|
|
<1395200046.23977.96193797.757C6481@webmail.messagingengine.com>
|
|
<alpine.LSU.2.00.1403191013240.31260@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
|
|
Message-ID: <1395226351.18057.96296969.765874C2@webmail.messagingengine.com>
|
|
|
|
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014, at 09:21 PM, Tony Finch wrote:
|
|
> Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm> wrote:
|
|
> >
|
|
> > You see it all the time in standards with low and poor adoption. Optimising
|
|
> > for the edge cases. Case in point the argument against SUBMIT via IMAP and
|
|
> > POP - instead needing a separate authenticated connection for SMTP so that it
|
|
> > can support all the future extensions which might be added to SMTP.
|
|
>
|
|
> Indeed. Particularly annoying.
|
|
>
|
|
> Aside from the operational problems you listed, there is an architectural
|
|
> problem with ESMTP for message submission: the IETF refused to describe a
|
|
> way to represent envelope extensions in RFC 822 message headers, which
|
|
> means MUAs have to invent their own non-standard ways to represent this
|
|
> information in draft messages and saved copies of sent messages.
|
|
>
|
|
> A sensible design would be like BCC: where the submission process
|
|
> constructs the envelope based on information in the message header and
|
|
> strips any extraneous headers. If you do that then draft and saved
|
|
> messages can use a standard format and you can trivially put the
|
|
> submission process into the IMAP server.
|
|
>
|
|
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg11566.html
|
|
|
|
I've signed up to that list now.
|
|
|
|
I've argued about the SUBMIT via IMAP issues before, and every time I've
|
|
been shot down by the "it's not future-proof", and even more clear "we've
|
|
chosen another way to do that, and we're not going to rehash the arguments
|
|
we made at the time, go read the archives to see why you're wrong and also
|
|
stupid".
|
|
|
|
It kind of turned me off the whole standards world for a while, because for
|
|
every excellent thing like CONDSTORE you get a whole ton of architecture
|
|
astronaut solutions like BURL.
|
|
|
|
But standards are the only way to make things useful for more than your own
|
|
little walled garden, so there's really no choice. I don't want to
|
|
improve one little walled garden.
|
|
|
|
Bron.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Bron Gondwana
|
|
brong@fastmail.fm
|
|
|